Dave thinks he can use his old-timey salesman tricks to make his case. Just "make them admit to widely accepted premises (as vague as possible), then sneak your methods in as supposedly "obvious" inferrences from those premises, and make them think they've already agreed that they work". Is that what your little handbook says, dave?

If so, I got news for you: It may work with your "gullible rubes", but it won't work here.

Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

Yes, you have still forgotten something. Quite a few things, actually.

Yeah. Octohatters that need someone to feed them. And wipe their butts. Don't forget those folks. What would the world do without them?

Well we know that in YOUR world they will be "exposed" as "parasites" and promptly removed from your Davetopian society. So you tell us.

Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

Speaking for myself, and possibly myself alone, I don't want, and never will want, to live in an isolated shack in the woods; to drink loads of goats milk; to have the incredibly monotonous and boring diet that Dave seems to be advocating.

Furthermore (heresy alert!) I have seen with my own eyes that tillage, IF PROPERLY DONE, need not result in loss of topsoil - at least in the UK agricultural environment round me. Correct maintenance of field drainage, wide headlands, care of and reinstatement of hedges, care with ploughing (no fine tilth until planting/sowing), use of cover crops and so on.

It works. It seems to me that we have enough varied landscape and land use to maintain (in the UK) a decent variety of viable and interlocking ecosystems

HOW to motivate billions of people to change their eating habits so that they ONLY eat food produced in this way ...

That is, food produced by some combination of "Walter style" gardening plus rotationally grazed animals.

??

Oh oh oh!I know! Call on me!

By showing them the joys of living in a firetrap, shitting in a bucket, and generally reverting to neolithic level of social and cultural interaction.

Oh - and taking snarky, uninformed swipes dripping with soul-crushing bitter envy, at anyone who spends years, decades and entire careers mastering fields of science you know nothing about. That will attract millions of devoted followers all by itself.

Last Edit: July 05, 2016, 06:14:14 AM by VoxRat

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

If everyone in the world were rich, then all it would take would be an education process to educate everyone why they should eat differently. Affordability of "real food" ( which enhances ecosystems instead of destroying them ) would not be a problem.

But everyone's not rich. In fact there are a lot more poor to lower middle-class people than there are rich people.

If everyone in the world were rich, then all it would take would be an education process to educate everyone why they should eat differently. Affordability of "real food" ( which enhances ecosystems instead of destroying them ) would not be a problem.

But everyone's not rich. In fact there are a lot more poor to lower middle-class people than there are rich people.

So my focus in how to change people's eating habits is on this group.

Follow?

I always thought the two types of people are those who divide people into types and those who don't.